If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I would assume Kia as well but they may not want to buy the package as i assume the stadium rights and the kit rights are being sold together. Certain companies may not want to attach their name to something that could be getting negative press like the stadium could during the first few years of sharing with the other thing.

I would assume Kia as well but they may not want to buy the package as i assume the stadium rights and the kit rights are being sold together. Certain companies may not want to attach their name to something that could be getting negative press like the stadium could during the first few years of sharing with the other thing.

The other thing is the Argos and the CFL. Those words won't be censored here.

Maybe they will take the new tenants as a great way to synchronize sponsorship? Is it still Rona?

Keep the MLSE war going! How much of a middle finger would it be if Rogers takes up as sponsor! It would make sense, only because they own 37.5% of the team, they have the Rogers Zone and the Rogers Club Box. Seats stay red, and if you don't want to put the actual name Rogers on the jersey the logo itself would look cool on the kit!

I'm really happy it's changing; two teams with the same sponsorship is ridiculous. (Montreal) Ten years ago I said it and I'll say it again IMO Canadian Club would be an amazing jersey sponsor.

I agree so far as its preferable to have different sponsors but not unheard of (see Glasgow) but the fact that one of the two teams represents the same city as their sponsor is what makes it redonk to me. Montreal can have the BMO.